there are significantly more cars around than bikes.

I see what you mean and agree, that relative numbers would be nice. But what would the counter argument be? That if there were more bikes, then bike-related deaths would rise more than car-related deaths would shrink? It would be hard to prove that.

Also, the matrix for cities still shows cars as a much bigger problem, while European cities have plenty of cyclists. Again, relative numbers would be nice. Or a comparison between a dutch city and a polish city, for example. But if i compare both tables (overall vs cities), i am certain the argument holds.